Andris Liepa, former Bolshoi Ballet star turned ballet entrepreneur, is to return to the London Coliseum with his company Les Saisons Russes du XX1e Siecle from July 16 to July 20 2013. The company will perform three programmes – a total of six ballets – which will include the London premiere of “Cléopâtre – Ida Rubinstein”, choreographed by Patrick de Bana plus five of Mikhail Fokine’s greatest works: “Le Spectre de la Rose”, “Scheherazade”, “Chopiniana”, “Polovetsian Dances” and “The Firebird”.

THE PROGRAMMES

Programme 1: Cleopatra/Ida Rubinstein, Le Spectre de la Rose, The FirebirdTuesday July 16 at 7.30pm and Wednesday July 17th at 7.30pm

Programme 2: Cleopatra/Ida Rubinstein, ScheherazadeThursday July 18 at 7.30pm and Friday July 19 at 7.30pm

In addition, there will be a special matinee on Wednesday July 17 at 2.00pm (Chopiniana & The Firebird only)

“Cléopâtre – Ida Rubinstein” is choreographer Patrick de Bana’s tribute to the enigmatic actress/dancer Ida Rubinstein (1885-1960) and star of Sergei Diaghilev’s Ballets Russes who danced in the title role during the company’s Paris season of 1909. Rubinstein danced with the company for two years and left in 1911 to form her own company. Adored for her luminous stage presence as much as her dancing, Ida quickly became a popular Belle Epoque figure in the arts world as well as a generous benefactor. Details of her personal life have remained sketchy through the decades and de Bana draws on history and urban myth to create the mysterious, glamorous world of Ida as she rehearses and performs what was to become her greatest role.

The ballet recounts the story of the creation of Cléopâtre by Fokine in 1909; De Bana has chosen music by the great composers who collaborated regularly with the Ballets Russes such as Stravinsky, Rimsky-Korsakov, Glazunov, Faure and Ravel; in addition he has employed the music of Omar Faruk Tekbilek, the renowned Turkish flautist and one of the world’s foremost exponents of Middle Eastern music whose compositions give de Bana’s ballet a beautiful, mysterious extra dimension. The London premiere will feature Ilze Liepa, sister of Andris, in the title role.

In July, Andris Liepa, former Bolshoi Ballet star turned ballet entrepreneur returns to London with his company Les Saisons Russes du XXIe Siècle from July 16 to 20. Headlining the season is Patrick de Bana’s “Cléopâtre - Ida Rubinstein,” being seen in London for the first time, which is being danced alongside a selection from Mikhail Fokine’s greatest works: “Le Spectre de la Rose”, “Scheherazade”, “Chopiniana”, “Polovetsian Dances” and “The Firebird.”

“Cléopâtre” is not a reconstruction of Diaghilev’s original, but rather a tribute to the enigmatic actress/dancer Ida Rubinstein and star of the Ballets Russes who danced in the title role during the company’s Paris season of 1909. It recounts the story of the creation of the ballet, drawing on history and urban myth to create Rubinstein’s mysterious, glamorous world.

Looking ahead to the season, Liepa kindly agreed to answer a few questions from Ballet-Dance’s Charlotte Kasner about the Liepa Foundation, Diaghilev and recreating the repertoire.

CK: What inspired you to set up the Liepa Foundation?

AL: My father, Maris Liepa, died in 1989 at the age of only 52, before he could open his own company to realise the many plans and ideas he’d been developing. In 1996, [what would have been] the year of my father’s 60th birthday, when I finished dancing, I set up the Maris Liepa Charitable Foundation in order to promote the development of ballet and to continue his work and the many, many creative projects that were always in his mind. Maris’ dream was to do something dedicated to the reconstruction of Fokine’s work. It was the Soviet era (i.e. before ‘glasnost’) and it was a very difficult time to do such things and Fokine was almost forgotten by the Russian people. He was considered a defector when he moved to New York, where he died in 1942. My sister Ilze and I wanted to continue our father’s work so it became a main aim of the foundation to revive lost or forgotten ballet masterpieces such as those by Fokine and to offer scholarships to promising young dancers.

CK: What were your reasons for choosing to present the Diaghilev repertoire?

AL: For many years my father researched and collected materials on Les Saisons Russes in Paris with a view to reviving masterpieces of Russian ballet which Diaghilev presented at the beginning of the century and which had a huge influence on the development of culture all over the world. After the Russian Revolution of 1917, the new Soviet regime tried to lure Diaghilev back to Russia from Europe, but he decided to stay away. As a result he was written out of the history books for more than 60 years. My father was the first to return to Russia a Fokine ballet which had never been performed there: this was “Le Spectre de la Rose” which he revived in 1966 and subsequently taught me how to dance. It was the role Nijinsky became so famous for, and it was my first experience of the Diaghilev repertoire.

CK: Given that Diaghilev was an exile for a large part of his life, how is he regarded in Russia today?

AL: I’ve been working on this project for more than 20 years and I think we’ve really been able to inspire people to think it’s a great idea to reconstruct the Diaghilev repertoire and to use the name of Saisons Russes. Diaghilev was always ahead of the times. He used machinery and new technology. He used modern equipment for his own productions. He was the first person to use electricity in the theatre in Paris [although it was already in use in London, where the Savoy Theatre was lit this way in 1881]. He practically invented international touring [although Noverre toured extensively across Europe and a few early 19th-century companies toured in Europe and the USA. “Giselle,” for example, had been seen in London, Milan, and Boston and New York within a year of its creation].

Modern audiences want to see something great so I really try to put modern energy into old choreography. If you don’t put the energy in, it’ll look weak and old fashioned. A few years ago a fashionable new club called Diaghilev opened in Moscow and for a few years it was the most popular nightspot in the city. Although the cultural population already knew who he was, he was suddenly a new and fashionable name with a whole new audience.

CK: Do you think that this differs from the way that he is regarded outside of Russia?

AL: Yes, because he was forced out of people’s memories after the Revolution and his repertoire was largely forgotten because it wasn’t performed in Russia. In Europe it was a totally different situation. He was a formidable force in the worlds of opera and ballet, a powerful impresario who collaborated with composers like Stravinsky, who made stars out of Nijinsky, Leon Bakst, Anna Pavlova, and many others including of course George Balanchine who eventually founded New York City Ballet.

CK: Was the Diaghilev repertoire known and/or performed in the Soviet Union?

AL: Just a few ballets such as “Chopiniana,” a couple of versions of “Petrushka” including original choreography by Fokine and a score by Stravinsky, and “The Firebird,” but not really good ones. When I was with the Bolshoi, we performed them only at special occasions. They were never in repertoire.

CK: How have you set about re-creating the repertoire?

AL: I’ve restored everything that exists. For example, I found a great film of “Firebird” with Margot Fonteyn; and in New York, a great version danced by Cynthia Gregory from the 1960s. The premiere of Diaghilev’s “Firebird” was in the Paris Opera and it was done with costumes by Alexander Benois but they were too heavy to carry. Diaghilev destroyed a lot of costumes and sets anyway. I went to Russian libraries and found beautiful sketches by Alexander in St. Petersburg and lots of other material. We premiered the restoration of the original version in 1993 in St Petersburg at the Mariinsky Theatre. It was Fokine’s dream to bring “Firebird” back onto the stage of the Mariinsky; it was never performed while he was alive.

CK: How close do you feel that this version comes to the original presentations?

AL: All versions that I’ve done are close to the materials that exist. I have great admiration for Fokine and Diaghilev, the great designers etc. It’s in my family’s blood and I’ve tried to restore them with admiration and respect.

CK: What have your dancers learned from rehearsing this repertoire?

AL: I think they learn how to make a ballet grow instead of being ‘just’ performers. In the real productions the most important things are acting technique, being a great partner… In modern versions these are sometimes missing.

CK: Does their approach and/or technique need to change from presenting contemporary works?

AL: Probably all the Diaghilev works were revolutionary and totally modern at the time; it was the beginning of modern ballet. Fokine presented the first modern dance in “Firebird” with unusual steps. I think it’s a great situation today. I was working with the Mariinsky three months ago because I have done a production of “Firebird” with them and everybody really loves it. You have to present all these works correctly to the youngsters; it becomes a great experience for them.

CK: Why do you think that the Diaghilev repertoire continues to fascinate audiences more than one hundred years after its creation?

AL: Because he was ahead of his time. People then weren’t ready to take in some of his ideas. Audiences didn’t understand. They hated the music, the costumes, the choreography…but now here we are celebrating his work.

What I have done is to go a little further and start to create new versions. Some of the ballets were totally lost. For example, with “Cleopatra” we started to do the original version, but realised it had weak music that Diaghilev didn’t like so we’ve used different composers. In our version we used the idea of Ida Rubinstein performing in the Paris premiere in 1909. We wanted to show how Ida became a star; not a ballerina, but a great actress. We made this great ballet and dedicated it to Diaghilev.

Unfortunately Les Saisons Russes has been dogged by bad luck at the opening of this London run. Ilsa Liepa’s prior injury forced the cancellation of the latest work, “Cleopatra,” and last night, gremlins in the lighting box made for a sticky evening all round with an uncomfortable hiatus after the opening work followed by an impromptu twenty minute interval.

The performance got off to a tame start with “Spectre de la Rose” replacing “Cleopatra”. Yulia Makhalina danced the Karsavina role extremely well but was not matched in intensity by her partner Xander Parish who gave a rather muted interpretation. It is easy for the male role to slide into a fey impression of a flower rather than an erotic evocation of a flower-made-man in the way of dreams. The work is haunted by description of Nijinsky’s exiting jeté through the window; how lucky we are that there is no film of it. There are certainly a few men dancing now who have prodigious jumps, but if Parish is one, he refrained last night. The set is also rather fussy and naturalistic. A chair, a window and a birdcage will suffice.

“Firebird” fared better and proved to the most successful work of the evening. Much was made by Liepa of the recreation of the original sets and costumes, and for the most part this worked extremely well, especially the iridescent greens and blues of the corps de ballet. However, for some reason, the Firebird was in a tutu, which, gorgeous though it was, was far removed from Karsavina’s original. Alexandra Timofeyeva warmed up to give a spirited rendering after a rather nervous start, no doubt not helped by the extended delay. Mikhail Lobukhin was a worthy Ivan and the soloists from the Kremlin Ballet were suitably lovely Russian princesses. The set gave a proper sense of scale and colour but looked a little skimped on where painting was concerned.

The evening ended with the old warhorse “Schéhérezade.” There is always a guarantee of enjoying the score whatever the performance and, it must be said, that this is a very dated ballet. The garish clash of colours and excess of harem pants and turbans no longer have the exotic (indeed erotic) resonance that they had in the first two decades of the 20th century although there were glimmers of the hysteria that would surround Rudolph Valentino’s fake Sheikh in the years that followed its first performances. No fault could be laid on the dancers but it smacks more of the pantomime than the harem. It was saved from totally campness by fine performances from Yulia Makhalina as a wonderful, passionate Zobeide, not least her pleading in vain for her life at the end. Xander Parish was much more comfortable as the Golden Slave and had some real opportunities to shine. He lacks the in-your-face on-stage masculinity of a Ruzhimatov and maybe needs a little more confidence to throw his all at the role to put in a memorable performance.

It is a pity that the company cannot afford an orchestra. They are not helped by having to dance to (as usual over-amplified) recordings. The opening of “Firebird” should creep up on one and make the hairs on the back of the neck stand up rather than be blasted out at disco volume.

Worth seeing for good rather than spectacular dancing and it will be interesting to see if Liepa’s promise of bringing Cleopatra over next year will materialise.

The late rescheduling of programmes caused by Ilza Liepa’s unexpectedly needing a second operation on a knee injury and the lack of a replacement dancer meant no “Cléopâtre - Ida Rubinstein,” Patrick de Bana’s telling of the making of the Diaghilev ballet, on this, what should have been the second programme of the Les Saisons Russes visit. “Should have been” because in fact what the audience got was simply two ballets from the rejigged programme one.

Prior to “The Firebird,” director Andris Liepa arrived on stage to tell something of the story of the recreation of the original sets. He was warm and engaging, although he didn’t make up for the unfortunate lack of a programme. Equally unfortunate was the use of recorded music. I’m not sure whether it’s merely that recordings were never designed to be played in such vast arenas, or whether theatre sound systems themselves are the problem, but as usual many of the delicate nuances in the score were lost. At least the volume was reasonable for a change. I do sometimes wonder whether a requirement for being a sound engineer is to be partly deaf.

Any recreation from something a century ago is only ever going to be a best approximation, but Anna Nezhnaya and Anatoly Nezhny’s take on Alexander Golvin’s original designs are certainly striking. The deep blues, purples, reds and greens leap out at you. The dance didn’t quite have the same effect, although the Kremlin Ballet’s Alexandra Timofeyeva was a spiky and feisty Firebird in her appropriately flame red tutu, although of the course the original costume was rather different.

Although the ballet has a dramatic sense, and even a few atmospheric moments, it tends to emphasise more cartoonish qualities a tad too often. The golden haired Prince Ivan, danced by Ilia Kuznetsov was likeable, even if he did look like one of those perfect princes found in Disney films. He was all exaggerated gesture; not always done to great effect. There was more Disneyesque imagery in the shape of the Koschei, whose hunched figure prowled around the stage with plenty of evil intent, and dressed in the most marvellous skeletal costume. The star turn came from Natalya Balakhnicheva, a demure Princess of Unreal Beauty full of delightfully shy glances and smiles. The ladies provided contrast in their white robes, although their heavy-looking platinum blonde wigs weighed them down in more ways than one, and someone really does need to teach ballet dancers how to throw and catch apples. The other magical beasts provided some fun with their crazy leaps and turns.

Far more enticing was “Shéhérazade,” the story of what the slaves and the harem get up to when they think no-one is looking. Leon Bakst’s bold designs, full of clashing primary colours are a sight for sore eyes and so was the dance, although the ballet opens relatively slowly as the Sultan and his brother make plans to pretend to go hunting in what is in fact a ruse to catch out his concubine Zobiede, who he believes to be unfaithful. Once they have disappeared, the rest of the cast get on with the orgy and the dancing; and what dancing!

As Zobiede, Mariinsky Ballet principal Yulia Makhalina, was quite scintillating. She flirted with the audience and the Golden Slave, danced by Nikolay Tsiskaridze, the outspoken Bolshoi Principal who has been linked one way or another with many of the recent goings-on in that company, well and truly captivating both. Tsiskaridze has a powerful stage presence and brought real authority and strength to the role while still managing to show plenty of passionate desire for his woman. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a male dancer look so happy to be where he was. His soaring split jetés and lightning-fast pirouettes in second brought gasps from the audience. Best of all was the way the electricity flowed between them, the stage crackling and sparking with raw emotion as they danced out their love for each other in the sensual and sexy pas de deux. Who needs pointework when ballet is like this?

Elsewhere, the odalisques, danced by Yuliya Voronina, Valeriya Pobedinskaya and Alia Khasenova were a delight. The Chief Eunuch is a bit of a pantomime role, but Roman Volodchenkov bumbled around to great effect. The rest of the harem gave their all too as the tension built and built towards the Sultan’s return, the killing of the Slave and Zobiede’s spine shivering suicide.

Liepa does struggle for resources, and maybe with some of recreations he overreaches himself occasionally, but who really knows what ‘original’ means anyway? During one of his chats to the audience, he said that he hoped to bring “Cléopâtre” to London next year. I for one hope he makes it.

Last edited by David on Fri Jul 19, 2013 10:30 am, edited 2 times in total.

I was also sorry that Cleopatra didn't happen as Ilse Liepa is such a consumate artist, but I can draw some consolation from the promise to bring it next year.

As someone who has worked on the sound desk at a ballet performance, I'm puzzled that no adjustments were made to the recording to try to improve on the quality to match the Coliseum's acoustic. Perhaps with both recordings being played straight through without any need for complicated cues, the recording was simply turned on and left - at least that's my theory.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum